swimmerdude99 wrote:Can you clarify what it means in the legend under Fighters?"Attack Range of 1Bombard range of 2Can atack or bombard any region"That last line seems inconsistent with the first two lines? I don't understand that...

Euro - Russian Pact. Soviet sounds so 80s Rocky/Rambo.All of the text that is for the fronts is almost unreadable and even hard to notice. Not really needed is it?Are we getting a symbol for the infantry?Black lines as impassable? And with the impassables, are they based on anything in particular?An idea for you, how about giving each wave its own unique win condition but leave out the US troops from this. They just have to survive.

In 2154 after a century of US hostility, some of the nations decided to end the hostilities and made a co-ordinated attack. Taken by surprise, it was all the US could do to fight back. Your orders: Defend the country against overwhelming numbers!

This is the premise for the new map brought to you by isaiah40. After Fractured America and China, will this map sit nicely with the others we have? Would you like to see this game in the future and if so, do you see anything that might need changing?

Looking good, Isaiah. In regards to the legend, since you said you were just working on it, have you thought about flipping the 4th column (I.E. 'You will only.. / All empty regions... / All units withing...') to the left side of the legend? The information therewithin seems like info I'd want to read over first before moving onto the icon information (reading left to right more so).

Additionally in terms of the legend, I am always in favor of adding bullet points if you aren't using space to separate main ideas (like the 4th column does with spacing).

AndyDufresne wrote:Looking good, Isaiah. In regards to the legend, since you said you were just working on it, have you thought about flipping the 4th column (I.E. 'You will only.. / All empty regions... / All units withing...') to the left side of the legend? The information therewithin seems like info I'd want to read over first before moving onto the icon information (reading left to right more so).

Additionally in terms of the legend, I am always in favor of adding bullet points if you aren't using space to separate main ideas (like the 4th column does with spacing).

I'll check back with some other feedback soon hopefully!

--Andy

All of the above are good suggestions and will be done for the next updatre.

The first thing that comes to mind is that the legend needs some clarification as far as what can and can't be attacked. The attack routes all seem a little incoherent. So I think the best solution is to list what can't be attacked as opposed to what can be attacked. That'll significantly reduce space usage in the legend and clear things up quite a bit.

Suggestions:

Empty RegionsCan attack all adjacent regions

INFCan attack all adjacent regions except for Bombers.

FightersAttack range of 1Bombard range of 2(since there appears to not be any restriction on what Fighters can attack)

BombersAttack range of 2 Bombard range of 3Can't attack Fighters or other Bombers

nolefan5311 wrote:The first thing that comes to mind is that the legend needs some clarification as far as what can and can't be attacked. The attack routes all seem a little incoherent. So I think the best solution is to list what can't be attacked as opposed to what can be attacked. That'll significantly reduce space usage in the legend and clear things up quite a bit.

Suggestions:

Empty RegionsCan attack all adjacent regions

INFCan attack all adjacent regions except for Bombers.

FightersAttack range of 1Bombard range of 2(since there appears to not be any restriction on what Fighters can attack)

BombersAttack range of 2 Bombard range of 3Can't attack Fighters or other Bombers

Hover-TanksAttack range of 2.Can't attack Fighters or Bombers

CitiesCan attack all adjacent regions

Assuming this is all correct, what do you think?

This would be a much better way of listing the information. As it is, it's very unclear what attacks what.

Nolefan's suggestions would go a long way towards clearing up the attack routes.

nolefan5311 wrote:The first thing that comes to mind is that the legend needs some clarification as far as what can and can't be attacked. The attack routes all seem a little incoherent. So I think the best solution is to list what can't be attacked as opposed to what can be attacked. That'll significantly reduce space usage in the legend and clear things up quite a bit.

Suggestions:

Empty RegionsCan attack all adjacent regions

INFCan attack all adjacent regions except for Bombers.

FightersAttack range of 1Bombard range of 2(since there appears to not be any restriction on what Fighters can attack)

BombersAttack range of 2 Bombard range of 3Can't attack Fighters or other Bombers

Hover-TanksAttack range of 2.Can't attack Fighters or Bombers

CitiesCan attack all adjacent regions

Assuming this is all correct, what do you think?

I can deal with these suggestions with the exception of the Bombers bombard range. I would prefer to leave it worded as it is now "Bombards 3 regions away". Bombard "range" denotes up to the regions.

nolefan5311 wrote:The first thing that comes to mind is that the legend needs some clarification as far as what can and can't be attacked. The attack routes all seem a little incoherent. So I think the best solution is to list what can't be attacked as opposed to what can be attacked. That'll significantly reduce space usage in the legend and clear things up quite a bit.

Suggestions:

Empty RegionsCan attack all adjacent regions

INFCan attack all adjacent regions except for Bombers.

FightersAttack range of 1Bombard range of 2(since there appears to not be any restriction on what Fighters can attack)

BombersAttack range of 2 Bombard range of 3Can't attack Fighters or other Bombers

Hover-TanksAttack range of 2.Can't attack Fighters or Bombers

CitiesCan attack all adjacent regions

Assuming this is all correct, what do you think?

I can deal with these suggestions with the exception of the Bombers bombard range. I would prefer to leave it worded as it is now "Bombards 3 regions away". Bombard "range" denotes up to the regions.

I honestly don't see a difference, but if that's what you want to go with, that's fine.

just a personal opinion, shouldn't the nuetrals for the territories that have higher auto deploy have a higher neutral count? for instance the bommer gets +3, granted it can't attack planes or other bombers, but seriously?! I mean think about it, you kill 3 nuetrals to MAKE up the troops you kill in one turn. I think that will turn into the only type of territ people want, obviously it will be most valuable even if you raise it to a higher nuetral count, maybe the +1 autos could be nuetral 2, then +2 autos are nuetral 3, and then the +3 autos are nuetral 4? just throwing that out there